The Pensions Ombudsman (TPO) has upheld a complaint against Greenacre Group Limited for failing to pay contributions into a worker’s Nest pension despite deducting contributions from her pay.

The employer was ordered to pay £8.91 into the scheme, as well as ensure that the complainant, Miss L, is not financially disadvantaged by its amendment to her scheme account on 16 March 2024 when £26.58 was removed.

In addition, the employer has been ordered to pay Miss L £500 for the “significant distress and inconvenience” it caused her.

Miss L complained that the employer, despite deducting contributions from her pay, had failed to pay into the scheme on time, stating that contribution amounts did not match her payslips and that the delays in paying contributions had caused her distress and inconvenience.

Miss L was informed in August 2023 by the scheme administrator that her pension contributions had not been paid by the employer, but the employer sent out a message a couple of days later informing staff that it was aware of this, and April’s pension was recalculated.

It stated that whilst this wouldn’t affect staff’s pay, it did affect the pension contributions for some of them.

Miss L contacted the employer after the staff message, and it said there had been a recalculation on staff hours as it was set up wrong in April, and hence the wrong amount of pension was paid in May, but the NI and Tax shouldn't now change.

It said there had been a recalculation on staff hours as it was set up wrong in April, and it will confirm any changes once it's all updated.

The scheme administrator contacted Miss L to say that the June and July pension contributions had also not been paid. The employer informed Miss L that it was engaged in communications with the scheme administrator and working to resolve the issues.

Miss L brought her complaint to TPO in November 2023.

The scheme administrator contacted Miss L several times over the next couple of months, informing her that her August, September and October contributions had not been paid by the employer.

On 11 January 2024, £20.21 was paid to the Scheme for Miss L’s May 2023 and June 2023 employee pension contributions, but the amount paid in did not match Miss L’s payslips.

A month later, the scheme administrator wrote to Miss L informing her that pension contributions due on 10 November 2023 had not been paid by the employer.

In February 2024, the scheme received a payment for Miss L’s pension contributions for July 2023, August 2023, and September 2023, along with the employer contributions for these months; again, these payments also did not match the figures shown on Miss L’s payslips.

Each month was underpaid by £0.91, so £2.73 in total.

In March, the scheme administrator debited £15.19 as a ‘correction’ from Miss L’s employee contributions and £11.39 from the employer’s contributions and later in the month the scheme received £4.03 as an employee pension contribution and £3.02 as an employer’s contribution – the final pension contributions from the Employer to Miss L following the end of her employment.

In July, the employer explained to TPO that it had recently found a discrepancy and was making corrections where required, which it said was related to the Lower Earnings Allowance (LEA) entered into its software to calculate pensionable earnings and the scheme amended Miss L’s pension balance by crediting three x £0.91 to cover underpayments.

The scheme administrator then contacted TPO to provide a calculation showing that there had been an investment loss of £12.26 and then informed TPO that it had adjusted Miss L’s pension account by a total of £3.64.

So, based on this information, the credit difference between Miss L’s payslips and the amounts paid into the Scheme was understood to be £4.26.

However, in February 2025, the scheme administrator, in the previous correspondence, referring to the adjustments, was incorrect and said instead it was £2.73.

On 14 March 2025, TPO explained to the employer that, following the scheme administrator’s correspondence regarding the overpayment, they had asked for an explanation for the debit adjustments to Miss L’s account in March 2024, totalling £26.58, but a response was not received.

A month later, the scheme administrator told TPO that the employer had requested that the adjustments be carried out on 16 March 2024.

The case was passed on to the adjudicator, who concluded that further action was required by the employer as it had failed to remit the contributions due to the scheme.

The complaint was passed to deputy pensions ombudsman, Camilla Barry, who said that despite the employer providing further comments following the opinion, it does not change the outcome and agreed with the adjudicator’s opinion.

In her decision, Barry stated: “Miss L has complained that the employer did not initially pay all the contributions due to her scheme account when it should have.

“I find that employee contributions were deducted by the employer and then paid late into the scheme.

“The employer has failed to provide a satisfactory explanation for the amendment made to Miss L’s scheme account on 16 March 2024, when a debit of £26.58 was applied. I find this also amounts to maladministration.

“Miss L is entitled to a distress and inconvenience award in respect of the significant ongoing non-financial injustice which she has suffered.”

---